This is Selling-through-Businessland in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 28-Mar-1989 19:14:18 From: Unknown Subject: Selling through Businessland I suspect that Businessland courted NeXT, when they learned that the new SPAC-based machine from Sun Microsystems wasn't going to make it out on schedule. The cube makes a nice middle level workstation machine that will give the Businessland a nice set of choices in workstations. Several of the rumors I've heard are to expect the Businessland price for the entry level NeXT system to be around $10K (US). It will be interesting to see what is going to be done about customer support. Businessland having to develop a support channel might partially explain the relatively high $10K price. You are in essence paying them up front for the support you are going to get. Maybe?... Should be intereseting, though. Bill >From: rec@dg.dg.com (Robert Cousins)
Date: Sun 29-Mar-1989 13:42:50 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland Actually, since there are now a number of more powerful machines available at lower cost, one wonders how successful this tactic will actually be. The new wave of 88000 based workstations (which do an honest 17+ MIPS) are available with Unix, monitor, etc. for approximately the same cost. I know, I managed the DG AViiON AVX 400 development here at DG which fits in this class. Anyone who has ever used a machine of this class will never want to move back to the (now) relatively slow '030. Robert Cousins >From: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Date: Sun 30-Mar-1989 16:07:38 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <121@dg.dg.com> rec@dg.UUCP (Robert Cousins) writes: > ... The new wave of 88000 based workstations (which >do an honest 17+ MIPS) ... Now, I'm no hardware expert, but isn't the whole point of RISC machines that they have a small instruction set that they can execute quickly? Does that not mean that MIPS numbers for RISC machines are inherently inflated? Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying an 88000 isn't faster than a 68030 on real work; I really don't know. But the obvious calculation of 17MIPS / 5MIPS = 3.4 times faster is wrong, isn't it? Or is that 17 MIPS figure normalized to VAX MIPS? I don't mean to start a discussion more appropriate for other forums; I'd just like everyone (me included) to know exactly what kind of systems Robert Cousins is talking about.
Date: Sun 30-Mar-1989 19:32:30 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <689@garcon> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: >Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying an 88000 isn't faster than a 68030 on >real work; I really don't know. But the obvious calculation of > 17MIPS / 5MIPS = 3.4 times faster >is wrong, isn't it? Or is that 17 MIPS figure normalized to VAX MIPS? >Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office The ratio of 3.4 is not unrealistic for this comparison. The ratio of floating-point speeds might be significantly higher. Of course, much of what you do on a computer is I/O bound anyway - like compiling programs and such. It is also complicated by the fact that software always gets more complicated on the faster machines, so speedups are sublinear. An 88000-based machine will feel more responsive than a similarly designed 68030-based machine, but it won't *feel* like a factor of 3+ except for CPU-intensive tasks. ---------------------- John D. McCalpin ------------------------ Dept of Oceanography & Supercomputer Computations Research Institute mccalpin@masig1.ocean.fsu.edu mccalpin@nu.cs.fsu.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------- >From: gshute@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Glenn C. Shute)
Date: Sun 31-Mar-1989 00:13:38 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <2540@tank.uchicago.edu> ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes: > >Getting back to the subject of this thread: when is the Businessland >announcement supposed to take place? I had thought it was yesterday, but have >seen no mention of it in the papers. In the March 27th Info World it sez: "Businessland will distribute NeXT Systems" The announcement is to take place in San Francisco on Thursday and will feature 12 software vendors showing applications of a third-party software directory. They also mentioned that there are now 85 commercial software developers working on applications and that 0.9 will also be announced and available within 30 days. >Robert >------ >ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu >------ >generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine Glenn C. Shute Computer Science Department Cal Poly, SLO. Ca. gshute@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU || {csun,voder,trwind}!polyslo!gshute >From: tron@wpi.wpi.edu (Richard G Brewer)
Date: Sun 31-Mar-1989 20:45:03 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <121@dg.dg.com> rec@dg.UUCP (Robert Cousins) writes: >Actually, since there are now a number of more powerful machines >available at lower cost, one wonders how successful this tactic >will actually be. The new wave of 88000 based workstations (which >do an honest 17+ MIPS) are available with Unix, monitor, etc. for >approximately the same cost. I know, I managed the DG AViiON AVX 400 >development here at DG which fits in this class. Anyone who has ever >used a machine of this class will never want to move back to the >(now) relatively slow '030. > >Robert Cousins Isn't that the truth - DEC is on the WPI campus today spirring alot of interest in their new workstation series, one of which uses a MIPS RISC microprocessor, and all of witch come bundled with Mathematica, which, to my knowlege, STILL isn't shipping with the NeXT... Richard G. Brewer +----------------------------+--------------+--------------------------+ | Richard G. Brewer (TRON) | Worcester | rbrewer@wpi.bitnet | | WPI Box 149 | Polytechnic | tron@wpi.wpi.edu | | 100 Institute Rd. | Institute +--------------------------+ | Worcester, Ma 01609-2280 +--------------+ "Power through better | | (508) 792-3231 | VaNdaLs Sack | design and engineering" | +----------------------------+--------------+--------------------------+ >From: dfickes@bucsb.UUCP (David Fickes)
Date: Sun 31-Mar-1989 23:08:28 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland The answer is YES.... Pick up a copy of BusinessWeek (April 10 issue) and take a look at page 80. Business Land has committed to $100 million in 12 months. They mention that the machine is a $10,000 (commercial price?) I'll type in the article sometime soon.. (pick up a copy of the durn magazine if you want the news NOW!) Other interesting notes from the article: 1. Compaq pulled it machines out of BusinessLand 2. Sun Microsystems has spurned BL stating that their customers would rather buy direct. 3. BL is trying to become more than a retailer and is attempting to become a large installer of networks (which also happens to be where the margins are) 4. BL is betting that Unix machines should account for 30% of office sales by 1992 as opposed to the current 3%. 5. OS/2 is still the #1 operating system targeted by system developers 6. NextStep will appear on IBM Unix machines during the summer. The article is rather evenhanded, trying very hard not to go whole hog. The last statement is a good summary: "...if Jobs can deliver all the things he says he will, Next could well become a strong influence on computing in the 1990s. For now, at least, he's has made all the right moves." (edit note: "he's has" is from the original not a typo) - david
Date: Sun 01-Apr-1989 23:00:24 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <689@garcon.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: >Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying an 88000 isn't faster than a 68030 on >real work; I really don't know. But the obvious calculation of > > 17MIPS / 5MIPS = 3.4 times faster > >is wrong, isn't it? Or is that 17 MIPS figure normalized to VAX MIPS? It's normalized to benchmark performance in seconds, where the performance of the latest version of VMS, using the latest compilers, on a VAX 11-780, is honorarily labeled "1 MIPS" (note that "MIPS" is not plural). The most recent VAX 11-780 Dhrystone (v1.1) number I have seen is 1792/second. There is about a 15% performance (number/second) decrease in Dhrystone numbers in version 2 of the benchmark compared to version 1.1. There is a similar effect in comparing version 1.0 and version 1.1 of the benchmark. In other words, the same machine will execute fewer Dhrystones/second on later (higher numbered) versions of the benchmark. RISC CPUs tend to do better on the Dhrystone relative to CISC CPUs than is the case with large real-world programs. Anywhere from 10% to 50% better. RISCs with register windows suffer most heavily from this effect (e.g., SPARC). The 20 Mhz 88k executes 32,000+ Dhrystones/second. The 25 Mhz 68030 does about 8000. That computes to a 3.5x integer performance advantage for the 88k on Dhrystone v2.1. The 20 MHz 88k does about 7 MFLOPS SP, 3.5 MFLOPS DP. This is 10 to 20 times faster than the 68030/68882 chipset. The MIPS R3000 has very similar performance. The i860 may be 15% faster at the same clock speed (integer), but that may be an illusion due to Intel benchmarking chicanery (in-lining of string functions in Dhrystone). The i860 FP performance is 2 to 3 times better than the 88k's. The 68040 at 25 MHz provides 13.5 MIPS (Motorola's number, no Dhrystones available. A number much below 25,000 Dh/s would call the MIPS rating into question, however), and 2 MFLOPS SP (what benchmarks this is based on has not been publicly stated). By the time the 68040 is available in production quantities (1Q 90), you can expect the next generation 88k to be in sampling (and available in production quantities six months later). available data. It is not unusual for actual relative performance of different CPU architectures to vary by a factor of 2 or 3 when using different benchmarks and/or applications! Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL. __American Investment Deficiency Syndrome => No resistance to foreign invasion. >From: jgreely@diplodocus.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Date: Sun 03-Apr-1989 14:48:14 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <1749@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> zdenko@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Zdenko Tomasic) writes: >In article <121@dg.dg.com> rec@dg.UUCP (Robert Cousins) writes: >>Actually, since there are now a number of more powerful machines >>available at lower cost, one wonders how successful this tactic > ^^^^^^^^^ > True, but what do you get with it? > How much in disks, memory for the low price? > What about software costs? Is it included? I was trying to keep this from being a DG commercial, however, to answer your questions does force me into product specific comments. Please note that my comments here are mine alone. I am not speaking for DG and am a developer and am not in marketing and therefore some of the "what is included" may be wrong. Anyway, here goes. For a less biased review, I recommend reading the April MIPS magazine article. The basic system comes with the monitor (1280 x 1024, 70 Hz), X-windows, DG/UX (DG's multiprocessor industrial strength Unix which is both SVID and BSD compliant and 88K BCS/ABI compatible), NFS, a C compiler and misc. utilities along with 4 megs of RAM (expandible to 28 megs now, 112 with 4 megabit chips). Needless to say, the keyboard, mouse and IEEE 802.3 interfaces are also included. Software developers can apply for heavily discounted machines under the Design/Win program. > >>will actually be. The new wave of 88000 based workstations (which >>do an honest 17+ MIPS) are available with Unix, monitor, etc. for > ^^^^^^^^^^ > Speed is intriguing, but how does it perform with respect > to i/o? Does the rest of the system keep up with CPU? Very well. > Are there compilers available to take advantage of the new > capabilities? Actually, yes there are quite a few in 88/Open's Software Initative and by the end of the year, there will be quite a large number of software vendors with packages running on ABI compliant machines. Some names include GreenHills, Oasys, Frame Technology, MicroFocus, Language Processors (LPI), Hunter Assoc., Phoenix Technology, Insignia along with several DBMS companies and numerous applications packages. The compilers all generate 88K code which harnesses the power of the machine. > Which languages? Other software? Languages including C, F77, ADA, Lisp, PL/I, Cobol, Basic, and I think even an RPG compiler (I'm not sure on that). Most of those languages will be available from more than one source, usually in name brands which people will recognize. THis is all the result of the 88/Open's Software Initiative and its ABI which allows software developers to host to one 88K machine and have guaranteed compatibility with all other ABI compliant machines. Developers are jumping at this opportunity to place their software onto this new generation of high powered platforms with a single port. > >>approximately the same cost. I know, I managed the DG AViiON AVX 400 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > With equivalent software and peripherals? While there is seldom a situation where two products are 1-to-1 comparable, there is much similarity between the configurations as pointed out above. > >>development here at DG which fits in this class. Anyone who has ever >>used a machine of this class will never want to move back to the >>(now) relatively slow '030. [Stuff deleted] >. . . . but one should exploit multicpu capabilities of >MACH first with several '030s (and later 88K) including paralellizing DG/UX is ABI compliant, supports multiple processors and is available to anyone to license. >compilers. . . . . > >In short, NeXT won't be obsolete tomorrow if they keep developing >and start materializing the cube's potential. The new RISC machines >have speed advantage, but also a lack of new software disadvantage. >Perhaps both can somehow merge for users benefit (let's hope >so). I disagree. There are not currently more than 40 developers working to develop NeXT compatible hardware and software offerings of the class and magnitude of those in 88/Open. The list of ISV's supporting the software initiative includes: Absoft, Applied Logic Systems, Cognos Software Dolphin Server Technology Frame Technology Franz, Inc. Hunter Systems Informix Software Insignia Solutions Language Processors (LPI) MBP SOftware Micro Focus NKR Research Oasys Opus Systems Phoenix Technologies Pick Systems Progress Software Relational Technology Retix Silicon Valley Software Southwind Software Tadpole Technology Telesoft Translation Systems Uniplex Unisoft Wollongong Group Wordperfect Not bad, huh? >-- >___________________________________________________________________ >Zdenko Tomasic, UWM, Chem. Dept., P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201 >UUCP: uwvax!uwmcsd1!uwmcsd4!zdenko >ARPA: zdenko@csd4.milw.wisc.edu Robert Cousins Speaking for himself, not DG. >From: edmoy@violet.berkeley.edu
Date: Sun 06-Apr-1989 20:37:52 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland Computer and Information Science In article <12057@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> woan@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Ronald S. Woan) writes: >Actually, the press release I saw listed Adobe and Aldus, as well. One >stated that Aldus was working on page layout (ala Pagemaker) for the >NeXT, and I believe that Dow Jones has been working with next to release >a database of historical data. Whoops! Missed the shift there. My intention was listing the developers from his list that were also on NeXT's, and then ask him where the other companies were, all of which I pulled off the NeXT puff-piece. Yes, Aldus is working on Pagemaker, Adobe is porting Illustrator and their PostScript type library, and Dow Jones is looking at NeXT for distributing large financial databases (their current demo has a full year of the Wall Street journal, indexed and cross-referenced). -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely) >From: jgreely@previous.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Date: Sun 06-Apr-1989 20:31:03 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland Computer and Information Science In article <1877@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> zdenko@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Zdenko Tomasic) writes: >In article <42030@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> J Greely > <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >>Nonsense. It's a high-end Mac with a real operating system) > I hope not. I hope it is much better than Mac. > Why are you afraid of competition? Says who? Afraid of competition for what, the NeXT? Simply put, no one is aiming in the least for the same market. A high-speed Unix box is *not* competition, since neither speed nor Unix are the primary selling points of the system. I replied in the manner I did simply to drive this home (he can quote press releases, so can I). The Mac is not a bad machine, but it suffers from an overdose of "design philosophy". The NeXT has many of the same ideas behind it, built onto a more mainstream base. >><insert more commercial propaganda> > ^^^^^^^^^^ > Just like you do. Tit for tat, right? Precisely. That's why I did it. I just happened to have recently received NeXT's latest propaganda sheets, so I made appropriate use of them. It seemed fair. >>"of the class and magnitude". Don't you love it when they put you >>down? Seriously, on what information do you base your numbers? Are >>you working from the current press releases, or just punting? > Granted, he was a bit vague, but aren't you asking now for what you > objected in the first place (commercial!) ? Nope. I want to know what he means by "of the class and magnitude". All he did was list companies. Some reasonable explanation of what sort of applications he considers worthwhile would go far towards supporting his position. As it is, it meant absolutely nothing to me. I consider Adobe Illustrator a very worthwhile development, but does he? Is professional MIDI control software of sufficient magnitude, or is that just wasting precious cycles? While we're at it, what performance freak would consider X-Windows a virtue on a machine shipped with a base 4 meg? <delete irrelevant discussion of the virtues of capitolism, along with an amazing amount of whitespace> My point was that his commercial said nothing relevant to the NeXT machine. All it did was state how good the DG box is, and imply that the NeXT is junk by comparison. If all you're after is MIPS, that may be true, but NeXT isn't building Speedy Gonzales (more of a "Cat in the Hat"). -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely) >From: jgreely@previous.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Date: Sun 06-Apr-1989 06:30:30 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland Computer and Information Science (I should start out by saying that any comparison between NeXTs and high-performance workstations is based on the erroneous assumption that the NeXT is intended to compete with existing workstations. Nonsense. It's a high-end Mac with a real operating system) In article <123@dg.dg.com> rec@dg.UUCP (Robert Cousins) writes: [much about the DG boom box. Reads like a press release] >Languages including C, F77, ADA, Lisp, PL/I, Cobol, Basic, and I think >even an RPG compiler (I'm not sure on that). Well (in NeXT-land), C is a given, Lisp is bundled, FORTRAN has been announced, Ada and COBOL would be ... amusing, and Basic will probably show up at some point. <insert more commercial propaganda> >I disagree. There are not currently more than 40 developers working >to develop NeXT compatible hardware and software offerings of the class >and magnitude of those in 88/Open. "of the class and magnitude". Don't you love it when they put you down? Seriously, on what information do you base your numbers? Are you working from the current press releases, or just punting? > The list of ISV's supporting the >software initiative includes: Pulling out competing press releases, only five from your list are currently listed as developing for NeXT: Absoft, Frame Technology, Franz, Inc., Informix Software, and Relational Technology. So where are Adobe, Aldus, Dow Jones, Kinetics, Lotus, and the rest? I didn't spot them on your list, so I guess they're not doing anything of sufficient magnitude. >Not bad, huh? Sort of. Most of the companies you listed don't sell anything I want, and many of the names mean absolutely nothing to me. If it was meant to impress, it doesn't. -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely) >From: rec@dg.dg.com (Robert Cousins)
Date: Sun 05-Apr-1989 18:02:52 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland In article <245@nueces.UUCP> chari@nueces.UUCP (Chris Whatley) writes: >While the endless arguments about new processors & speed vs. old processors >& compatibility are no more intersting than ever, I have to nitpick here... > >> I disagree. There are not currently more than 40 developers working >> to develop NeXT compatible hardware and software offerings of the class >> and magnitude of those in 88/Open. The list of ISV's supporting the >> software initiative includes: >>[list of developers] >> Not bad, huh? > >No, not at all except you are wrong about Next's development agreements. At >a recent press conference, Jobs said "85" companies are developing hardware >and software for the Next. As for class and magnitude, I'm sure they are >quite similar since many of the companies you listed and many of the companies >that develop for Next are either the same company (Absoft, etc.) or are porting >some garbage from MS-DOS (Lotus & WordPerfect). > >> Robert Cousins >> Speaking for himself, not DG. > >Chris The width of the software available under 88/Open encompases numerous areas which is not currently covered in the NeXT announcement. Only time will tell whether the difference is substantial enough to be important in the long run. This is a place where people of good faith can disagree and where a person's perspective will have great impact on the definitions of "class" and "magnitude." Since the 88K has the ability to run many applications which will roll over and die on the NeXT, I would suggest that there is a substantial magnitude of software which will be available on 88K machines which won't be there on the NeXT. As for the class of software, I think that it speaks for itself. Anyway, I think that I did not make myself clear. There is currently only one company building hardware to run NeXT compatible applications -- NeXT. In other words, given a NeXT port of a piece of software, there will be exactly one choice of hardware upon which to run it. This is not the case in the 88K world. The implications of this are many so I will limit myself to some of the most important ones. 1. There is already a large dynamic performance range of 88K ABI compatible products. This stretches from 17 MIPS up past 40 and will probably break 100 MIPS before the end of the year. Furthermore, it was pointed out at the AViiON announcement that DG will eventually be offering a 500+ MIPS quad processor. Therefore, one can develop code on one machine and migrate the binary up to a machine of the required performance. This also means that it becomes reasonable to have a heterogenous network of 88K ABI compliant machines sharing the same file server with only one set of binaries. 2. The price range varies as substantially as the dynamic performance does. From 17 MIPS at under $8k all the way up to multiprocessor servers in the $100+ K range. Capabilities vary as well. There will be sufficiently diverse specialized machines (all ABI compliant) to handle a wide slice of the computing world -- MUCH wider than a single machine from a single vendor. 3. Since there is no NeXT high end, lets compare the single data point to the available 88K systems. Aside from the substantial CPU performance difference, there are machines with faster graphics, higher resolution screens, better I/O, more expandibility (VME or NuBUS the Apple way) along with a host of other important feature choices. 4. There are multiple COMPATIBLE operating systems to choose from. DG offers DG/UX (multiprocessor, System V.3 with 98% of BSD), Unisoft offers both UniPlus and UNIX. Several other companies are actively developing ABI compatible operating systems also. In short, you will have your choice. I have even heard rumors at 88/Open meetings that Mach will be ported to one or more of the platforms. 5. Bang for the buck. Can you buy a NeXT machine for $500/MIPS? 6. The competition between ABI compliant products will be based upon value and performance. This means that end users will always be able to change vendors without sacrificing software investments. I can't think of a better way to motivate hardware vendors to keep the bang/$ improving at a fast clip. I obviously could keep going for quite some period of time. There was a plan to create a 68K ABI, but it didn't work due to vendors who liked to be incompatible. As of now, I know of only two de facto ABIs in the microprocessor based world: the 88K ABI and the PC clone environment using MS-DOS. They are the only ones I know of where several vendors are able to develop compatible platforms and where developers are able to follow some well defined rules for binary portability. Numerous other products can claim one but not both. These include POSIX (source code portability only), Apple Mac (but only one hardware vendor), CP/M machines (no well defined rules for portability but numerous vendors), and lastly, NeXT where there seems to be similar problems. Robert Cousins Speaking for myself alone. >From: rec@dg.dg.com (Robert Cousins)
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.